Let the Dead Bury the Dead

1. Raguram: Will the sins that one incurs can be reduced by giving offering to the temple, donations and doing several social services?

Suki Sivam: According to Hinduism the accounts of sin is different and merit is different. One cannot increase or decrease the other. In Christianity there is a principle that by doing more meritorious act the burden of sin can be reduced? But it is not like this in Hinduism. There is separate punishment for sin and separate fruits for the merits. One won’t tall with the other.—V. V. P. Meet, 28, Suki. Sivam, Religious teacher, Thugluk, (Tamil), 3-6-15, pp. 20-25, p. 25

1. Meenakshi: Tell about the thoughts or incidents that attracted you in Bible and Quran.

Suki Sivam: The words of Jesus, ‘leave the dead with the dead’ is bit difficult to understand. But it has profound meaning. On listening the teaching of Jesus on a sea shore, one fisher man, after repentance began to follow Him. That time some people came rushing tell him that ‘your father is dead’. Then he asks (Jesus) ‘can I go and finish the final rite to my father and then come’? That time what Jesus said this that ‘leave the dead with the dead’? He tells this with this meaning that the un-awakened people there, though are alive, yet they are dead. What Vallalar (Ramalinga Swami of Vadalur) said, ‘be awakened’ also means this only? The one who is not awakened is equal to the dead (person) is also the thought told by the Hindu saints too. p. 25 [I tried my best to give the literal translation of Sivam’s Tamil. See the original at the end.—db]

I am not surprised when I read Sri Suki. Sivam’s exegesis on ‘Let the dead bury the dead’ in Muktiveda. He is one of my favourite speaker and writer. Rarely one can find such a speaker who will call spade as a spade not sparing anyone just to please them. Though he will speak what he thinks as correct, sometime his interpretation on scripture and philosophy won’t ‘tally’ with the original scripture and philosophy/theology. But this shows how many like him (including me) cannot understand the scripture and philosophy/theology of other faith, unless it is learnt from the adherents of that faith.

I need not point out to those who knows Muktiveda that (Matthew 8: 21-22 & Luke 9: 59-60) ¹ it was not a fisher man who asked the permission to the Lord to bury his father. Next is that no one came and told him that his father was dead. And the entire context is not about remain awakened but the cost of disciple. Above all the historical context of this statement that ‘let the dead bury the dead’ is related more with the ritual related with the final rite among the Jews that time and nothing related to remain awakened. Not knowing this cultural/social background of the Jews Sivam gave his own interpretation on this incident. In Jews tradition, the body will be embalmed and rolled in a cloth. After a year or two when the body was complete rotten, then the bones are collect and put them in a small stone box specially made for this purpose then burry (actually keep/put) it in a small chamber specially cut out for this purpose. Of course Sivam is not the first to read such (Hindu) message in other’s scripture and he won’t be the lost one.

So in that incident the person who sought Lord’s permission to ‘bury’ his father could also mean that his father was already dead and the body was embalmed and put in the cave. Though he brag to the Lord that too before others that he will follow Him, yet he is not ready to pay the cost for the discipleship. So he wants to avoid that hiding behind in the excuse of ‘burring’ his father’s bone, which is the responsibility of the eldest son too. In that context the Lord point out his bogus claim to follow Him, tell him ‘let the dead bury the dead and you follow me’.

To the another question on the separate of accounts of ‘punya’ (merit) and ‘sin’ technically Sivam is correct, though the common view among the ordinary Hindus is that merits (punya) is earned to get rid of bad karmas and sins. In order to avoid future punishment in hell or bad karma to take lower birth, punya is sought (or earned) by every common Hindu. After death a person goes to heaven according to the merits he earned and enjoys all the pleasures of heaven. Once his merits are exhausted he has to come back to the earth to take another birth as per the karma he has done. Similarly he has to go to hell and suffer for his sin. And after his sin account is tallied, he has to come back to take another birth.² Of course eternal hell and eternal heaven is also there. Hinduism being the pluralistic inclusivism there is scope to accommodate all kinds of thoughts—particularly in religious matters.

However Sivam’s view that in Christianity there is a principle that by doing more merit the burden of sin will decrease is unheard. May be he might be sharing from his reading about the medieval Catholic Church practice of ‘The sale of indulgences’ from the Church to get rid of one’s sin.³ But such concept is completely absent in Muktiveda.

So this shows however one has good knowledge about her own faith and its scripture(s), when it comes to others faith and scripture, without knowing the ‘textual, historical and theological’ contexts, giving one’s own interpretation will misrepresent the tenants of that faith.⁴ And when such statements comes from a famous speaker like Sivam, then it becomes ‘gospel’ truth which most of the people, here Hindus will accept as it is based on the authority that Sivam has as an orator and scholar in his own right (he earned the title ‘Solin Selvar’ = Rich in oratory).

There is no point of sending this response to Sivam. People like him won’t accept such corrections easily and they will have their own defence for it. For example he could say, ‘let the followers of that particular faith have their own textual, theological and historical exegesis. But we too have our right to read our own message, as Bible does not belong only to the Christians. People like Dayanand is more concerned about technicality than “spirituality”’. And my intention is also not to point out any mistakes in his views but to high light one’s limit in understanding others faith—particularly the scriptures.

As a digression I have to mention here that once a person is established his reputation as a scholar or renowned speaker, they will ignore any rebut written by a lay person like me. For example, in the past I wrote a rebut to one such speaker’s view which appeared in Junior Vikadan. I never expected that magazine to publish my rebut. But they could have at least acknowledge receiving it and forward to that speaker. But now, in a competitive world with so many magazines, even electronic ones, as they have to fight for the survival they neither have time nor space for a lay person like me. But if it is related to a famous person, then such rebut will be published. For example, when k. Venkatesan gave a false account about Periyar Ramaswami about his cancer in mouth (see Junior Vikadan, ‘Tamizh Manne Vannakkam, 31-5-15, p. 24-25), in the next issue itself the rebut by Vidudalai Rajendiran was published (Junior Vikadan, 3-6-15, p. 20). Whereas I too send my rebut to K. Venkatesan’s speech but it was ignored both by Junior Vikadan and K. Venkatesan. (See for this ‘Removing the past and introducing new in my blog). By writing this I am not expressing my frustration, but there is no point of challenging those who established themselves in media. Unless it is related to politics, no such rebut will be acknowledge by any media at present.

Of course I too have conveniently ‘ignored’ several challenges and questions thrown to me by Christians. But what I tried to do is not to avoid correction but unnecessary controversies.

Notes

1. @The Cost of Following Jesus. Matthew 8

18When Jesus saw the crowd around him, he gave orders to cross to the other side of the lake. 19Then a teacher of the law came to him and said, “Teacher, I will follow you wherever you go.” 20Jesus replied, “Foxes have holes and birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head.” 21Another disciple said to him, “Lord, first let me go

and bury my father.” 22But Jesus told him, “Follow me, and let the dead bury their own dead.”

The Cost of Following Jesus. Luke 9

57As they were walking along the road, a man said to him, “I will follow you wherever you go.”

58Jesus replied, “Foxes have holes and birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head.” 59He said to another man, “Follow me.” But the man replied, “Lord, first let me go and bury my father.” 60Jesus said to him, “Let the dead bury their own dead, but you go and proclaim the kingdom of God.” 61Still another said, “I will follow you, Lord; but first let me go back and say good-by to my family.” 62Jesus replied, “No one who puts his hand to the plow and looks back is fit for service in the kingdom of God.”

2. Yama tells them—“You are noble souls duly blessed, since you have performed what is ordained in the Vedas. Good deeds that are conducive to divine happiness have been performed by you. (45) Ascend the celestial aerial chariot and go to heaven to enjoy the pleasures in the company of celestial damsels and fulfil your cherished desires. (46) After enjoying pleasures there, in the end when the merit is exhausted return to this place for reaping the fruit of what little evil you may have committed.”(47)— ibid. UMAASAMHITAA 7:45-47, p.1483

3. 1190 The sale of indulgences —relief from punishment of sins in exchange for the payment of money—instituted; — Wolfgang Simson, Houses That Change the Word: The Return of the House Churches. London, OM Publishing (2001) 2003, p. 61

4. See my response to the questioned asked by one ‘Hindu convert’, which will that without proper understanding of others cultural and religious practices in their context will mislead another to understand about them. However here the interesting point is that this question was asked by a ‘Hindu convert’:

A Hindu tradition does not permit sadhana without taking bath – I would be much freer talking to Mukthinath from my bed and doing meditation. I am a Hindu and if I do that, will I be wrong just because I am not following the tradition of my ancestors.

This shows how poor is your understanding about both ‘Hindus’ and ‘Hinduism’. Most of the Hindus when they get up from the bed, the first thing that they would do is to see their palm. Because all the presiding deities are dwelling on each finger. Several people will take the name of their God—both when they get up from the bed and when the go to bed. Is this not a sadhana? The ritual purity like taking bath is prescribed for hygienic and common good of all. Only when ritual activities are involved taking bath etc. are more strictly followed (here too exceptions are there). But when it comes to sadhana no one need to observe such outward activities of purity and pollution. It is interesting to note that such bodily purity is also recommended in Muktiveda in Hebrew 10:22 (Let us draw near to God with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled to cleanse us from a guilty conscience and having our bodies washed with pure water.—Heb. 10:22). We can find several reference about washing the hands and feet of the priest and other before entering to the tabernacle and temple. Above all Parasara dharma sastra says, ‘in emergency one need not follow all the rule and regulations regarding achara (tradition). When everything is normal, then one should follow them.’ So when a rule is given, there will be always exception and exemption. Let me finally say one thing about Christian sadhna. According to the Christian tradition (not muktivedic) before taking communion one should both confess her sins. Though one would do it before receiving the communion, you know that several people in the church are unworthy to receive it considering their life—which is known to everyone in the church. But they will go and receive communion—as part of ritual. Even a Pastor or others cannot stop it. So critiquing a particular aspect of a religion, without having proper understanding about it won’t help to anyone.

எஸ். ரகுராம்: செய்கின்ற பாவங்களை எல்லாம் செய்துவிட்டு, கோவிலுக்குக் காணிக்கை, நன்கொடை, சில சமூக சேவைகள் என்று செய்வதால் பாவத்தின் பாரம் குறையுமா?

சுகி. சிவம்: ஹிந்து மதத்தைப் பொறுத்தவரை, பாவத்தின் கணக்கு தனி; புண்ணியத்தின் கணக்கு தனி. ஒன்றினால் ஒன்று ஏறாது; இறங்காது. கிறிஸ்தவ மதத்தில் புண்ணியம் செய்யச் செய்யப் பாவத்தின் பாரம் குறைவதான தத்துவம் உள்ளது.ஆனால் ஹிந்து மதத்தில் அப்படியில்லை. பாவத்திற்கான தண்டனை தனியே உண்டு. புண்ணியத்திற்கான பலன் தனியே உண்டு. இதுவும் அதுவும் டாலி ஆகாது.–வி. வி. ஐ. பி. மீட்-28 ஆன்மிகச் சொற்பழிவாளர் சுசி. சிவம், துக்ளக், 3-6-15, ப. 20-25, ப. 25

ஆர். மீனாட்சி: பைபிள், குரானில் உங்களைக் கவர்ந்த வரிகள் அல்லது சம்பவத்தைச் சொல்லுங்களேன்

சுகி. சிவம்: இயேசுநாதரின் ’இறந்தவனை இறந்தவரிடமே விட்டு விடுங்கள்’ என்ற வாசகம் புரிந்து கொள்ளக் கொஞ்சம் கஷ்டமானது; ஆனால், பொருள் பொதிந்தது. இயேசு கடலோரத்தில் போதித்தைக் கேட்டு, ஒரு மீனவன் மனம் மாறி அவர் பின்னே செல்லத் துவங்குவான். அப்போது சிலர் ஓடி வந்து, ’உன் தந்தை இறந்து போய் விட்டார்’ என்பார்கள். உடனே அவன் ’நான் சென்று என் தந்தைக்கு இறுதிக் காரியம் செய்து விட்டு வந்து விடவா?’ என்று கேட்பான். அப்போது இயேசு சொன்ன பதில்தான் ’இறந்தவனை இறந்தவரிடமே விட்டு விடுங்கள்’ என்பது. அங்கிருக்கும் விழிப்படையாத ஜனங்கள் எல்லாம் உயிரோடு இருந்தும், இறந்தவர்கள் என்ற பொருளில் அவர் கூறுகிறார். இங்கு வள்ளலார் கூட ’விழித்திரு’ என்று சொன்னதின் பொருள் அதுதான். விழிப்படையாதவன் இறந்தவனுக்கு ஒப்பாவான் என்பதுதான் ஹிந்து மதப் புனிதர்களின் கூற்றும் கூட. ப. 2